SSD Problems...I'm confused...

[ch3w2oy]

My read and write speeds say over 4,000MB/s. Right, is that real life? I'm not sure...When I copy a 21GB from my NVMe to my new SSD (now storage drive), it's barely pushing 1MB/s. WTF?

 

Okay, so I installed an SSD, cloned my NVMe to my new SSD, put it in another computer. Decided to take it out and use it as secondary storage on main computer.

 

EDIT: I didn't post this yet, but figured I will anyway. I figured it out, looks like my RAMCHACHE works.

 

Carry on..

 

 

[SupaKomputa]

6000 MB/s is very high even for samsung nvme which usually max out to 3000.

Looks like the RamCache's kicks in.

The transfer speed should be equal to your slowest drive Write Speed.

If your previous ssd is sata, then it would be max out to like 300-500 MB/s.

1MB/s is too low, are you sure your transfering with sata?

[ch3w2oy]

4 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

6000 MB/s is very high even for samsung nvme which usually max out to 3000.

Looks like the RamCache's kicks in.

The transfer speed should be equal to your slowest drive Write Speed.

If your previous ssd is sata, then it would be max out to like 300-500 MB/s.

1MB/s is too low, are you sure your transfering with sata?

I think it ended up slowing down because I had thousands of small files mixed in (bunch of different wordpress sites). Not 100% sure if that's the reason. But I kept cancelling it because that's just retardedly slow, so I started doing one folder at a time to narrow down the source and it seemed to only slow down when I got to the super small multiple files part. I'm assuming because it had to make so many new paths rather than just a couple at larger sizes. Does that sound right?

 

It was going from like 2-4GB/s down to 400MB/s (after the RAM cache reached limit) and then down to less than 1MB/s. Does it actually work as I described it above? because it really only slowed down when it came across tons of small files.

[SupaKomputa]

If you are transfering bunch of small files it could get to 1MB/s, its normal.

You should transfer 1 big files to measure its optimal speed.

Are you using this for webserver?

[ch3w2oy]

8 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

If you are transfering bunch of small files it could get to 1MB/s, its normal.

You should transfer 1 big files to measure its optimal speed.

Are you using this for webserver?

I build my sites using WAMP locally so I have local copies of my websites, and those I use WordPress on contains a shit load of files, unfortunately. 

 

I did try one big file and it was close to the 6gb/s, then between 300-500mb/s (after reaching the RAM cache limit). 

 

Seems pretty cool, I've never seen that feature before I just installed my shiny new Ryzen (proud owner here). 

[ch3w2oy]

Not going to lie, I almost had to change my pants after I saw my read / write speeds. Thought I just got lucky..

[Enderman]

Turn off RAPID mode.

[SupaKomputa]

You could try to zip the online version before transfering to your pc, it would decrease the transfer time massively.

As it would be transfering only 1 file, the speed will be optimal.

Because each files needs some overhead time to process the request.

And your FTP program can only support 10 files at a time (i'm talking filezilla).

[ch3w2oy]

1 minute ago, SupaKomputa said:

You could try to zip the online version before transfering to your pc, it would decrease the transfer time massively.

As it would be transfering only 1 file, the speed will be optimal.

Because each files needs some overhead time to process the request.

And your FTP program can only support 10 files at a time (i'm talking filezilla).

I was only copying local files from main drive to my new storage drive, no server, except for the one I run locally to simulate how a server runs so I can work with WordPress sites without being online. 

[ch3w2oy]

4 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Turn off RAPID mode.

What exactly is that? Sounds like I would want it on, no? 

[Enderman]

14 minutes ago, tomswife said:

What exactly is that? Sounds like I would want it on, no? 

No, it just uses your ram up to give high speeds to very little data to make benchmarks look great.

It doesn't change your real ssd speeds.

A program that needs high speed data already moves it to ram (for example video editing) so if it needed that speed it would have it already.

A caching algorithm just guesses what data it wants to speed up.

Also every time it has to change the data stored on the cache it has to move it back to the SSD, then move new data from the SSD back to the cache.

This ends up using your SSD more than necessary by constantly moving stuff back and forth.

Also all the other down sides like same/slower speeds when accessing data that isn't cached, risk of losing data from power outage, etc etc etc.

 

Basically if you have a special use case that requires a small amount of high speed data then make a proper ram disk.

If not, don't bother with rapid or other 'caching' software.

[ch3w2oy]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

No, it just uses your ram up to give high speeds to very little data to make benchmarks look great.

It doesn't change your real ssd speeds.

A program that needs high speed data already moves it to ram (for example video editing) so if it needed that speed it would have it already.

A caching algorithm just guesses what data it wants to speed up.

Also every time it has to change the data stored on the cache it has to move it back to the SSD, then move new data from the SSD back to the cache.

This ends up using your SSD more than necessary by constantly moving stuff back and forth.

Also all the other down sides like same/slower speeds when accessing data that isn't cached, risk of losing data from power outage, etc etc etc.

 

Basically if you have a special use case that requires a small amount of high speed data then make a proper ram disk.

If not, don't bother with rapid or other 'caching' software.

Makes sense. I don't move things around enough anyway, and no video editing, or anything that requires that fast of speeds. Not worth losing the life of my drives, I didn't think about that, so great point, thank you! I just clicked a few buttons that came with my Asus mobo, I didn't even realize that's what it was, which is why I was confused when I saw those speeds. 

[Enderman]

4 minutes ago, tomswife said:

Makes sense. I don't move things around enough anyway, and no video editing, or anything that requires that fast of speeds. Not worth losing the life of my drives, I didn't think about that, so great point, thank you! I just clicked a few buttons that came with my Asus mobo, I didn't even realize that's what it was, which is why I was confused when I saw those speeds. 

Yeah, I have two samsung SSDs too, but haven't even installed the software.

It isn't needed for the drives to function properly